Talk:IBM PS/1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Computing  
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

PS/1 or IBM PS/1[edit]

Moving this to IBM PS/1 I thought (should do that more often) to look at history. Saw that it had been moved from IBM PS/1 to PS/1. Oops.

Please look at "Category:IBM hardware". Almost all listed have the IBM prefix. There are a very few listed that should not, such as "key punch", Lexmark, etc. So "IBM xxx" would seem to be the consistent naming convention. (and there is a redirect) 06:08, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

" All PS/1 and Aptiva models included modems for accessing online help as well as preloaded software"[edit]

The above statement is incorrect. I have owned both an IBM PS/1 and an IBM Aptiva, neither of which came with a modem. I remember being really excited about buying my first modem for the PS/1 (was an ISA card). I then moved it to the Aptiva. Any thoughts? -- Jonnyt 17th Nov 08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


- The 2121 came in 4 submodels, I could probably dig up the original brochure if I bothered. I think all but the top model were 286s (or maybe 2 of the 4). The shittiest models came with a black and white monitor only but I believe they all had VGA. The better models have a taller case which had a proprietary ISA riser card with two 16-bit ISA slots, horizontally opposed, and both came from the factory empty. The IDE and FDD interface were on the motherboard (which is common today but in AT clones of that day this was less common), The modem has its own proprietary connector to the motherboard. - The monitor that came with did not have the motherboard in the damn thing. I've seen this said elsewhere, and it is just plain wrong. Also, it is incorrect to say that using the computer would have been "impossible" without the monitor that came with it. The monitor connects with 2 cables (that are permanently attached to the montior). The first cable has a standard HD-15 VGA connector, and is standard VGA. The second cable carries the 12V/5V/3.3V and AT power supply signals through a DB-15 (not high density) connector. So technically, if one needed to use one of these pieces of shit today, they could hookup a standard AT SMPS to this power connection and use any old monitor. It's only "impossible" if you consider everything that is pointless to be basically impossible.


This page is an absolute mess. It really has no redeeming qualities. The prose is disorganized and jumbled and it is rife with factual errors. I fixed some, but can't begin to fix them all in a short period of time.

I'm removing some of the errors, in a few cases without replacement. Sorry, but in some cases it is just plain easier to removes things that are clearly wrong than replace them with something that is correct.

Put the disputed tag because of the numerous problems. It may be somewhat laughable to people, because who would really give a shit about something as trivial as a poorly designed computer released in the early 90s. But to the poor bastards that do, that may just be searching google because they saw "PS/1" and wanted to learn more about it, this sorry thing is the first hit.— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

Missing models[edit]

This article overlooks at least one major model of PS/1. I personally bought four identical PS/1 models in around 1994 -- 486DX2/50 with 4MB of ram -- which I later upgraded to DX4/100 with 16MB that I used late into the decade. The main IBMs archive page of the PS/1 shows the case on the units in question. I'm not familiar enough to know the model numbers or anything, but we should probably somehow note that the article's coverage of the models is only a sampling, and not intended to be a complete list. //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 23:47, 20 November 2009 (UTC)